This forum is absolutely open to discussion when those points are backed up with verifiable information from sources that have a track record of being right.
I am absolutely open to my mind being changed. I am a scientist by training and so believe that any working theory is always only as good as the last set of data that proves it correct. As soon as new information arises or data that doesn’t fit the model is proven to be valid, that theory needs to be changed.
My position on this is that Russia is an aggressor, Putin is a tyrant, we absolutely should be arming Ukraine, and if a country aspires to join NATO then that’s their prerogative.
Change my mind.
Sadly all data is biased by agenda, all I can do is try to look at all sides, see what all the narratives are and try to disseminate what fits with what I'm seeing. I'm sure we can both find things to support any viewpoint which is easily dismissed by the opposing side.
I've said a lot of this previously, my focus is primarily on the needs of the people/citizens:
Given Russia's history with UKR, much like China and TWN, there's still a sense of ownership not only from the Russian government but also some of the populous, the exact percentage is open to debate.
UKR gov. has done very troubling things to the citizens and has been proven to one of the most corrupt governments in the world.
Putin, as much as I dislike him, is justified in stating what he is and is not comfortable with and he is not comfortable with what he sees as a threat (the UN) on his borders especially in a region which he still considers to be part of RUS, at least in spirit if nothing else.
Putin attempted to come to the table many times over the years to discuss this before military action but was dismissed and now feels his hand has been forced, so Putin being Putin has done what he's done.
This could have been negotiated before it got to this but here we are.
There are so many crimes the west is guilty of, I'll spare you the list of occupations and unwarranted invasions, occupations that claimed to be for 'humanitarian reasons' but were anything but. We turn a blind eye to genocide in China, to apartheid in Gaza but we're supposed to be up in arms about this?
Where the diplomacy? Where's the negotiation? Where's the compromise?
People seem to ignore all of the above factors and just think 'Putin: bad = Hitler' and I've seen calls in US media for his assassination, granted that's an easy rhetoric to get behind but that's not what the situation is.
Again, I do think Putin is an ex KGB thug but he is who we're dealing with and there's no changing that for now so we have to work with it.
The UN wants UKR and has fostered that relationship, great but it's not as simple as that. We have to work with our 'enemies' or simply other parties with conflicting interests because what if the tables were turned, would we not at least deserve to be heard? We have to move past knee-jerk reactions and into compassionate tolerance because the reality of the world is that we're not all the same, we can't all be on the same page, our behaviours vary based on many factors and we've all got to survive on this little spec of dust floating through nothingness because it is all we've got.
Peace takes work and no one will be happy with the compromise, that's the nature of compromise.
Fostering conflict by supplying instruments of death to take the lives of young men on both sides is not the answer, discussion and compromise with consideration of all the factors at play is the only way forward to minimise loss and tragedy.
If that's wrong, I'm happy to be wrong.
